I wish all of you a happy, healthy and sweet New Year. May we all be inscribed in the Book of Life.
DONATE: I created a Facebook Fundraiser on my birthday to support my activism, journalism, and research; along with my fiscal sponsor, the Northwest Alliance for Alternative Media. If you have a Facebook account I invite you to make a donation.
My headline is deliberately incendiary in order to emphasize the dire circumstances of American Jewish life. I acknowledge with Mark Twain that reports of the death of American Judaism may be somewhat exaggerated. But not by much.
The leadership, denominations, and organizations of the mainstream Jewish community are increasingly irrelevant and dying. They reflect the interests of older, wealthy Jews and diverge significantly from those of younger Jews. The former grew up with the Anti-Defamation League, the American Jewish Committee, Aipac, and Israel Bonds. The latter have little or no interest in their “father’s Oldsmobile.” The older generation may continue to affiliate with the Democratic Party. But they are centrist rather than progressive. The younger generation wants nothing to do with the corporate wing of the Party, represented by septuagenarian presidential candidates like Joe Biden and Hillary Clinton (Bernie Sanders is an exception).
Older American Jews, the ones funding the above mainstream organizations, are relatively depoliticized compared to the younger generation. If there is to be politics, it must be politics within a limited range of discourse. This is especially true regarding Israel. No BDS. No Nakba or apartheid. Israeli “Arabs” may be seen (i.e. acknowledged), but not heard. Jewish traditions are seen mainly through a nostalgic lens. Going to shul is reserved mainly for High Holidays. The two days (Rosh Hashana and Yom Kippur) when you dress up, don your kippah, grab a prayer book and try to follow along with the minimal Hebrew learned in religious school, and listen attentively, if passively to the rabbi’s boring sermon.
Zionists and the older generation lay the blame for this phenomenon at the feet of the arch bogeyman, assimilation. Supposedly, we are intermarrying at such a fast rate that we are dying off as we “marry out.” This is, of course, a false conception. Jews who marry non-Jews often raise their children as Jews. Not to mention that there is an increasing number of Jews of Color who are adding another strand of diversity to the tapestry of American Jewish life.
There once was a plethora of Jewish publications representing diverse and divergent political and religious viewpoints. Hadassah had the most popular Jewish magazine in the country. The Jewish Forward published print editions in English and Yiddish. There were Present Tense, Davka, Genesis 2, Commentary and a score of others. Today, most of them are gone, artifacts of an American Jewish past. If any continue to exist, they are shells of their former selves.
At one time, Jewish philanthropy was the envy of all other American charitable giving. Jewish federations raised hundreds of millions every year for local social services and Israel. Today giving has declined drastically as a younger generation spreads its wealth among a much more diverse array of causes, including many that are secular and non-Jewish. Instead of giving to the local federation, they give to their college alma mater, the symphony, the museum, and to other personal causes.
This carries over into synagogue life. Though the majority of American Jews are unaffiliated, many of those who are affiliated belong to either Conservative, Reform or Orthodox synagogues. Synagogue life has always been largely homogenous, with a narrow and conventional consensus of ideas taught children in Hebrew school regarding Israel and other issues. But at least in the past, there were rabbis and synagogues who prided themselves on their open-mindedness. Rabbis like Abraham Joshua Heschel (Jewish Theological Seminary), Leonard Beerman (Leo Baeck Temple), Harold Schulweis (Valley Beth Shalom), Arthur Hertzberg, and Marshall Meyer (Bnai Jeshurun) were lions for social justice. They towered above most of their peers in their commitment to prophetic values. They often stood outside the communal consensus, but by dint of their moral and social stature they enjoyed complete independence.
Today, this no longer holds true. There are few if any mavericks in American Jewish life. Those who are, have largely abandoned the mainstream community. Now there are speech limits: certain ideas and topics are verboten. Hillels on American campuses may not discuss or host programs about BDS or other issues deemed treif by the white, male national board of Hillel International. They may not host speakers who have ever endorsed any of these forbidden topics.
As a result, Conservative Judaism, in which I grew up, is a movement in crisis. It is bleeding members. While Reform Judaism remains far and away the most popular denomination, Orthodox Judaism is growing at a far faster rate. In the coming decades, it could eclipse Reform; while Conservative Judaism may disappear or remain a small vestige of its former self. The Conservative movement, more than the others, faces an identity crisis. It has always stood for a middle road between Reform and Orthodoxy. But American Jewish life no longer has much of a middle road. Jews have largely chosen either the right or the left. The center has not held.
IHRA: Defending the Indefensible
An example of the impoverishment of Jewish life is the politicization of anti-Semitism, so that it becomes a weapon used to defend Israel from its critics, whether Jewish or non-Jewish. The IHRA definition falsely labels criticism of Israel or support for BDS as anti-Semitic. That effectively excommunicates all Jews who think critically about Israel. And a great many of them are members of this younger generation.
Here in Seattle, for example, the local Jewish federation put forward the IHRA definition as a community-wide statement on the subject. It is no such thing. Whoever dreamed up this initiative, deliberately excluded the very Jewish groups and individuals who it sought to read out of the community: If Not Now, Jewish Voice for Peace, etc. Some of the dissidents have published this statement of protest. If you’re inclined, I invite you to sign it.
Why would anyone who truly wanted to represent the full diversity of the community do such a thing? Possibly because these American Jews are so frightened, so embattled, that they conceive of the world as the enemy of the Jewish people. They even see their fellow Jews as the enemy, if they stray from consensus discourse. THis, as I’ve written before, bespeaks the impoverishment of American Jewish life. We used to be a vibrant community that embraced independent thought. Now we have turned into automatons repeating the same few phrases like a robotic mantra: “Jewish democratic state,” “two-state solution,” “only democracy in the Middle East,” etc. All phrases that have long been obsolete.
The Decline of the American Rabbinate: ‘None of Us are Prophets’
All this, by way of introducing this woe begotten article from the Los Angeles Times, which polled local rabbis on what subjects their High Holiday sermons would address; and whether they would contain political content. The vast majority answered, No. No politics. Too divisive. Too threatening. Too much rocking the boat makes congregants sea-sick, etc.
This Beverly Hills rabbi at a modern Orthodox shul said it succinctly:
“People love to say, ‘Talk about politics,’ but none of us are prophets — it’s not our job,” Shofet said. “It takes away from the Torah, from our direct understanding. We have to understand that the only one we can turn to for protection is not government, it’s [God].”
An utterly preposterous argument. Abraham Joshua Heschel was as close to a latter-day prophet was any Jew could be. Did he say in his magnificent books embracing civil rights and social justice: “It’s not my job?” Did he say: abandon political engagement and trust only in God for salvation? What a betrayal of prophetic Judaism.
This rousing ‘endorsement’ of progressive Jewish values comes from the current rabbi of Leo Baeck Temple, which was home to Leonard Beerman’s thunderous sermons for 40 years:
“From the outside, people look at California as a whole, at Los Angeles, and at Jewish Los Angeles in particular as hyper-liberal,” said Rabbi Ken Chasen of Leo Baeck Temple in Bel-Air. “But very few congregations would say they don’t have a meaningful mixture” of liberal and conservative members.
Harold Schulweis’ successor at Valley Beth Shalom, Rabbi Ed Feinstein, wants to have his cake and eat it too. He wants those progressive values represented by his rabbinic mentor, but he doesn’t want to alienate his right-wing congregants (who are implied in the euphemism “heterogeneous”):
“We’re all caught between two poles: On the one hand, we are culturally alive, politically alive people; on the other hand, those of us who have heterogeneous congregations want to preserve our own communities,”
The Orthodox community tends to be the least embracing of universalism and the most particularist and parochial in its view of Jewish interests. This holds true for this local rabbi:
One of the things I learned from my experiences [speaking about politics] was it’s just wrong for the rabbi to cause people to feel like strangers in their own synagogue,” said Rabbi Yosef Kanefsky of B’nai David-Judea Congregation in Pico-Robertson, an Orthodox synagogue whose positions on LGBTQ inclusion and female leadership put it at the movement’s leftmost flank. “When I want to talk about specific policy — and this has been the case in regard to immigration in particular — I don’t do it from the pulpit.”
In other words, when this rabbi wants to talk about social justice or domestic politics he can’t do it in shul because his congregants don’t find it central to their Jewish concerns. These are all secular issues that don’t belong in the House of God. But the Orthodox too want to have their cake and eat it too. So they fulfill their obligations to their conscience by engaging in social justice outside the bounds of God’s sanctuary:
Instead, Kanefsky led a group of congregants to the U.S.–Mexico border to meet asylum seekers being released from immigration detention in January…
One of only two rabbis who offered unfettered support to the linkage between Jewish prophetic values and political engagement was Sharon Brous, who said:
“There’s no such thing as decoupling religion and politics,” Ikar Rabbi Sharon Brous said. “It’s a talking point used to silence those who come from the prophetic tradition, people who really believe our tradition calls us to stand with the poor, the vulnerable and the stranger.”
Which is all very well, until you discover that Brous was one of the rabbis engaged to lecture Muslim leaders as part of the Shalom Hartmann Institute’s normalization project, the Muslim Leadership Institute. It was conceived by ex-JDL leader and journalist, Yossi Klein Halevi, and his partner, Gulenist imam, Abdullah Antepli, as a means of “educating” young Muslim future leaders about the positive aspects of Zionism and Israel. It appears that Brous’ politics are progressive up to the water’s edge. But once she jumps in she becomes a liberal Zionist and reverts to her pro-Israel roots.
The rabbi of the iconic Reform institution, Wilshire Blvd. Temple, lays out a bowdlerized version of the prophetic tradition here:
Rabbi Steve Leder, senior rabbi of the venerable Wilshire Boulevard Temple, who steers clear of politics. “Instead of me issuing proclamations, we’ve built a social services center at one of our campuses where we feed 50,000 people a year, and we provide free vision and dental care for 5,000, and free ESL. That’s my statement.”
In other words, the rabbi can’t embrace progressive values inside the shul because it would alienate the grey-haired matrons and captains of industry housed in their Beverly Hills and Bel Air mansions, from which they look down on a city filled with the “tired, the poor, the huddled masses yearning to breathe free, the wretched refuse…the homeless and the tempest-tost.” No lifting of a lamp beside the golden door for this Jewish 1%. They tell Rabbi Leder to assuage his conscience and their own by fulfilling their values far away from the holy sanctuary.
Leder’s social service projects are not a real “statement.” Rather they are a cop-out. A way to say we can maintain a division between Judaism and politics by doing the latter far away from the former.
Very thought provoking, although I disagree with you. Theatrics are not necessary; “American Judaism” is not “dying.” Yes, there are many synagogues which are loosing members, but there are also many which are growing. You mention the decline of various large Jewish organizations but fail to mention that there are smaller, more local organizations which are growing and have very similar missions. You mention that various Jewish organizations are “deliberately exclud(ing)” organizations like Jewish Voice for Peace and If Not Now because they are “frightened” and “embattled,” but fail to mention that those are fringe groups which, despite having a large social media presence, numerically have almost no Jews participating in them. For heavens sake, my small local Conservative synagogue, despite being part of a movement which is “in crisis” and “bleeding members” still manages to draw a bigger crowd to it’s weekday mincha minyan than Jewish Voice for Peace and If Not Now could draw together if they had a combined national gathering.
@Thought Provoking: The overall trends are downward for membership in synagogues and Jewish organizations. Of course, there will always be outliers who do well, who gain members rather than lose them. But the overall direction does not bode well for the future for the entire community.
As for If Not Now and JVP, there are hardly “fringe” groups. It is an absolute lie to say that no Jews participate in them. This shows your own prejudices toward your fellow Jews. In fact, their membership and funding are larger than some of the mainstream organizations. You are making precisely the same mistake the mainstream leadership and community make in dismissing this powerful and legitimate alternative. In fact, these groups are growing by leaps and bounds compared to the losses suffered by the mainstream groups. If anything, they are the future–at least of Jewish youth.
National gatherings of JVP and INN draw hundreds, if not thousands of participants. Do you have hundreds at your weekday minyan? If so, you should get on the phone with the Chancellor of JTS and convey your secret to him so he can save his dying movement. Please stop spreading lies and offering opinions as facts when they are no such thing.
Excellent blog Richard. Now a progressive Jewish rabbi who stands for peace and social justice who deserves mentioning, is Tikkun’s Rabbi Michael Lerner and the Network of Spiritual Progressives. TWO links. HERE https://www.tikkun.org/rabbi-michael-lerner AND HERE https://spiritualprogressives.org/
@ Walter Ballin: Michael Lerner is not everything he’s cracked up to be. Yes, he does share some progressive values. But he is largely a liberal Zionist when it comes to Israel. Slightly more progressive than most, but not much more. An editor of Tikkun Magazine once invited me to contribute to their publication. I wrote a few articles. Then she told me that Michael was afraid he would be sued if he continued publishing my work. Which of course was nonsense. He also once demanded that I change the name of my blog because it was too close to the name of the magazine. I politely refused, of course.
Richard, Regarding your response to my comment about Michael Lerner, it’s been a long time but I recall now a blog you wrote on that. I don’t know what you could have written that Michael Lerner could have sued you for.
@”Walter Ballin : You misunderstood. He wasn’t worried about suing me. He was worried that someone else would sue him for what I wrote.
Richard, Actually I meant to say that it’s odd that Michael Lerner wouldn’t publish your articles after he invited you to do so. I don’t know how he could be sued over anything that you write. Just as I like very much reading what you have to say, I like what Lerner has to say too. This is although on Israel-Palestine I am a bit to the left of him. He believes in 2 states. I say that this is something that will have to be decided between the Israelis and Palestinians without the U.S. being a so-called broker while giving billions of dollars in aid to Israel. I also don’t see how with the way things are now there can be 2 states. I think that when the day ever comes that there is a peace settlement that there will have to be one state with equal rights for everyone, but this is something that the parties will have to agree on as I said. Who am I to dictate that there must be a Jewish state, when I’m not even living there?
@Walter: He didn’t invite me to write for Tikkun. The managing editor at the time did. When she told me that my work made Lerner nervous about lawsuits I stopped.
I agree. You named a few of the ethical moral leaders. Most of the others have sold out to racist Zionism, misogyny, and just hating anyone not like them.
“deliberately excluded…”
But you have no problem excluding settler as Judeans or Ultra-Orthodox as Taliban.
I am not saying it as criticism but it does make me question my own (and everyone else’s) judgements. Much of what you describe is far from the reality in Israel and the settlements. And much of the way the view you and other progressives view is far from your intentions.
At the end, we paint the other side in the colors that fits a frame in our mind and apparently, it is human nature to get self reinforcement by presenting the other as evil.
@ Joshua: I don’t believe settlers, but more specifically the extremist settlers common in most settlements, are Jewish. They are poisoning Israel and poisoning my religion. But unlike the Orthodox, who as a movement would read the entire non-Orthodox Jewish world out of Jewish life, I don’t pretend to have a system or movement that would excommunicate such settlers.
On the contrary, every post I write about settlers and settlements is based on either Israeli security sources or Israeli media reports. You can argue with them to your heart’s content. But you cannot say I do not reflect reality in the settlements. Unless you want to claim that such stories are fabricated a la Trump.
Not at all. If you don’t like bad press don’t do bad things and the media will have nothing to report. Do bad things and I’ll report them. That is, the facts as reported in credible Israeli media. Not invented or framed by my mind.
Richard, Right. My last comment reply was a correction to the previous one. I’m saying that whether it was Lerner himself or the managing editor, I find it odd that either would invite you to write an article and then for Lerner to not have your article because he was nervous about a lawsuit. I mean, what’s there to sue about? 🙂
Really? How can you say: “Leder’s social service projects are not a real “statement.” Rather they are a cop-out. A way to say we can maintain a division between Judaism and politics by doing the latter far away from the former.” when you know absolutely nothing about this. “…far away from the former” is utterly ignorant of you to claim. You obviously did not take the time to really understand what you were writing about, Instead you just cut and pasted from an LA Times article. The Temple’s Social Service Center is literally a few steps from its historic sanctuary; they are symbiotic. By design, you cannot park on the campus without the Family Social Service center being the first thing you see. I often preach about the center and its importance. Our congregation has donated many millions of dollars to create and sustain the center and over 600 of our members have given more than 7,000 hours of their time this year alone to running the center. Perhaps you should try harder to emulate the verse from Pirke Avot I often quote when encouraging the members of Wilshire Boulevard Temple to engage in the community around them: “Say little and do much.” Or, at least do your homework before you slam a Jewish institution getting it right….
@ Steve Leder: Rabbi, you are shearing my comments from the context of the article, which demonstrated that most Los Angeles rabbis are avoiding politically sensitive subjects in their sermons. The first words quoted from you in that article are: “Say little…” In other words, I read you as saying that you believed in not addressing such issues in sermons and other public statements from the pulpit.
Yes, it’s true you followed by saying “do much.” And your social service efforts point to the fact that you are taking some of your Jewish social responsibilities seriously. But social servies are qualitatively different than putting the stature of the rabbi on record on the major issues of the day. What sort of pulpit advocacy do you do? Nothing in your statement in that article indicates you do that.
In the verse you quote, Pirkey Avot surely did not mean to tell rabbis to “say little.” Rabbis speak, it’s a good part of what they do. THe question is what do rabbis speak about? My argument, and one largely supported by the LA Times article, is that rabbis are increasingly timid and cautious about speaking up about controversial issues of the day. And that this is a deeply alienating development that causes Jewish youth to abandon the organized community.
Nothing in the passage which refers to you and Wilshire Blvd Temple argues that you reject this approach. But I’d be happy for you to point to sermons or public statements you have delivered which take courageous, dissenting positions on some of the critical, difficult issues of the day such as: